Red diesel / VOSA

[Blackbart]

Plus I don't think the law works on weather it was an accident or not. They fact find.

 

Whether...not rainy stuff.

 

You are right and that is why the fox hunting law can not work because if a fox gets killed by getting up in front of a pack of hounds out trail hunting then it is deemed an accident, just like if your dog kills a cat.

 

If you are running round with red in your tank then it didnt get there by accident so you are rightly done.

[BRNDL]

 

 

You are right and that is why the fox hunting law can not work because if a fox gets killed by getting up in front of a pack of hounds out trail hunting then it is deemed an accident, just like if your dog kills a cat.

 

If you are running round with red in your tank then it didnt get there by accident so you are rightly done.

 

Deemed an accident is the key word in your statement. So this abbreviation allows fox hunting to continue? (genuine question)

[al4x]

yes it does, no issues as dogs will be dogs. as long as they set out with the right intention then so be it. Not sure what this has to do with tax evasion though, do you approve of working for cash and falsifying your tax return BRNDL as those are similar activities

[Blackbart]

Deemed an accident is the key word in your statement. So this abbreviation allows fox hunting to continue? (genuine question)

 

Yes, it allows it to continue.

 

It is a stupid rushed through law that can not be enforced

 

The whole thing should have been black and white,either ban it or allow it and not allow bit's of it.

 

Wether you are for or against foxhunting i think both sides would agree the law as it stands is not doing what it was set out to do.

 

That makes one side pleased the other not so.

[BRNDL]

yes it does, no issues as dogs will be dogs. as long as they set out with the right intention then so be it. Not sure what this has to do with tax evasion though, do you approve of working for cash and falsifying your tax return BRNDL as those are similar activities

 

Al4x,

 

That is a difficult question for me to answer. Personally, I am employed full time and pay a healthy amount of tax and N.I into the pot, although I do have a business outside of my primary work that does not declare tax at all.

Now, I assume some people are going to jump all over this branding me a criminal for defrauding the system. On a no frills approach I would agree with you.

 

That said,

 

I have every intention of running a legitimate business mid 2013

 

I would be against working and paying nothing into the pot, just working for cash.

[Ruairidh]

HMRC will ask of proof of purchase for fuel, if you've been on the red then you're not going to be able to produce clear diesel receipts.

You will be liable for a hefty fine and have to pay duty on red diesel.......the duty will depend on how far they can back date until you have receipts for your clear diesel, all will be dependant on mileage too.

 

Customs and Excise can also check your property and dip other vehicles there and others belonging to you.

 

As said above by HDAV Customs and Excise have more power than many other agencies.

Remember running on red diesel is tax avasion/ fraud.

If prosecuted maybe wouldn't look good on FAC? ?

 

Rich

 

They ask for your VAT number because there is a scheme called RDCO "registered dealers in controlled oils", it is a scheme where wholesalers of bulk fuel have to let HMRC know every month where they are selling the fuel to. These are then cross referenced, for example if a haulier were to buy 3000 litres of Gas it would not be suspicious, however if they were buying that amount from 10 suppliers then it would point to the haulier usng the fuel for road use not fork lifts and dokey engines. They cross reference everyones purchaes of Gas Oil and Kero which is sometimes used with the addition of hydraulic oil.

Gas Oil is not the same as road diesel, it may be soon with the changes in RTFO but no-one wants bio fuel in Gas oil at the moment, unless its imported (london), then it is likely to be a differnt cetane number, CFPP and flash point.

 

The thing that worries me personally is that if someone is prepared to run a vehicle on rebated fuel, are tehy also not taxing their vehicle and not insuring it?

What would the condoners on this blog say if for example they were hit, and god forbid, injured by someone without insurance, running on red and no tax and were then unable to work for a period of time?

[Gordon R]

although I do have a business outside of my primary work that does not declare tax at all.

Now, I assume some people are going to jump all over this branding me a criminal for defrauding the system. On a no frills approach I would agree with you.

 

That said,

 

I have every intention of running a legitimate business mid 2013

 

 

If you are genuinely running a business(which is liable to tax) and evading taxation, you are a criminal. I fail to understand why anyone would apparently boast about tax evasion, with the proviso that they would be going straight in the next year. Bravado - stupidity - take your pick. There is no third choice.

 

As a businessman, perhaps you should note that you don't declare tax - you declare the income and are subject to taxation on that income. :good:

Edited December 12, 2012 by Gordon R

[BRNDL]

If you are genuinely running a business(which is liable to tax) and evading taxation, you are a criminal. I fail to understand why anyone would apparently boast about tax evasion, with the proviso that they would be going straight in the next year. Bravado - stupidity - take your pick. There is no third choice.

 

As a businessman, perhaps you should note that you don't declare tax - you declare the income and are subject to taxation on that income. :good:

 

Are you still here...

 

"You are a criminal"...already said that Mr Numpty...........

"Boast about tax evasion"...where is the boast?

I simply answered a question and presented my answer based on the experiences unfolding in my life to date.

 

Get down off your high horse Gordon R, you will end up with a nose bleed you are that high up. Silly silly man.

Edited December 12, 2012 by BRNDL

[bedwards1966]

So if it comes about that red diesel is discontinued and legitamate previous users can claim back the duty on white diesel does this leave the door open for undetectable abuse? That is ,say a farmer has his tank of now white fuel for agricultural use, but what is to stop him filling up his diesel mercedes with the same fuel. Doubtless the VAT people could track him down on paper but roadside dipping and testing would no longer reveal misuse.

 

Blackpowder

 

I find this whole system hard to understand.

The current system works well in the sense that anybody can buy red and use it for whatever they want, and if they use it where they aren't allowed to it's easily identified.

 

The system you refer to (I'm not sure if it's going ahead or not, not heard anything for a while?) does, as far as I can see, leave the door for abuse not only open, but blown off it's hinges - I can't see how it would be possible to catch anyone sticking it in their vehicle. The paper trail means nothing, people working in an office don't have a clue how much fuel a tractor uses, they just have to accept what you tell them - take a combine using 1000 liters per day, filling up a couple of cars isn't going to be noticeable!

 

 

Perhaps (and this is the cynical side of me) they are considering this system so that they get more money in which they can hold onto before paying it back, and also so that if there are any doubts about the fuel use they can simply not pay it.

 

I would not be even slightly surprised if they require everyone claiming it back to be VAT registered, they may even set a minimum acreage for farmers to be eligible.

 

They could probably bring this in very easily, few would oppose it as many would see it as a way to use cheap fuel for everything, then they could slowly move the goalposts for qualifying to claim it back, eventually forcing most people onto the full duty.

[subsonicnat]

BRNDL its funny how folk always quote the speeding ticket simile when talking about law breaking. Yeah speeding is a serious offence and can cause death and injury BUT I think it is unlikely for someone who has been caught speeding once or twice to have a FAC/Cert refused on those grounds alone! Now someone prosecuted for breaking the law by using red diesel and getting caught doing so twice?? My moneys on a refusal!

 

As for your comment to me earlier about this just being a discussion, if you read back the full thread you will see that people are openly talking about breaking the law!

 

Its funny how people get touchy when folk tell them that they are simply no better than the bums who cheat the benefit system, just because its tax they think its ok! Its not and you know its not, you want to take the chance, go ahead but like others I hope you are caught and prosecuted! Oh and has been said enjoy the golf lol

 

I Was in our local gunshop some months back, a guy was selling ALL his guns:

He Had Been Caught doing 120MPH on the motorway:

His Shotgun Licence was REVOKED From that moment on, had to take them to gunshop and get rid of them ALL:

He Was Upset, but did say , He was in the Wrong: Be Warned:: Not hearsay, Happened in front of me in the shop:

If its Illegal you will be marked down for fac/Shotun:

[cockercas]

With the exception of a 40 in a 30mph fine 24yrs ago have never been in trouble with the law so I am indeed law abiding. so that answers your 1st point

that just means you havent been caught. there is a difference.

[subsonicnat]

that just means you havent been caught. there is a difference.

 

On A personal note then, Yes, Been flashed Twice By Camera`s ,must have been lucky, no film .

but on the other hand not doing excessive Speed: I Am NOT Squeaky clean : No.

Never said I was an Angel, . Just telling the tale as it was: And what had happened:

[Paddy Galore!]

who cares anyway? it always amuses me when one or two of our flock starts foaming at the gills and getting all holier than thou on the so called criminal element, truly priceless

if anyone is contemplating using red derv in their car or works van etc you know the consequences, up to you if you want to take a risk

[BRNDL]

who cares anyway? it always amuses me when one or two of our flock starts foaming at the gills and getting all holier than thou on the so called criminal element, truly priceless

if anyone is contemplating using red derv in their car or works van etc you know the consequences, up to you if you want to take a risk

 

I agree. Holier than thou...I like that.

 

[Gordon R]

BRNDL - I am not taking the high moral ground, merely looking down on you in the gutter.

 

To quote Captain Mainwaring - "you stupid boy". :lol: :lol:

[BRNDL]

Silly silly man.............

[evo]

who cares anyway? it always amuses me when one or two of our flock starts foaming at the gills and getting all holier than thou on the so called criminal element, truly priceless

if anyone is contemplating using red derv in their car or works van etc you know the consequences, up to you if you want to take a risk

 

well said that man,,,,i applaud you sir,, :good:

[kdubya]

Al4x,

 

 

 

That said,

 

I have every intention of running a legitimate business mid 2013

 

 

 

I believe the Krays once made a similar pledge

 

KW

Edited December 12, 2012 by kdubya

[Gordon R]

:lol: :lol:

[BRNDL]

 

 

I believe the Krays once made a similar pledge

 

KW

 

Ha! I am not a gangster just yet...

[JonathanL]

Drivers commit speeding offences - full stop. Most would argue it is accidental - not everyone drives like an idiot all the time. If someone sets out every day with the intention of breaking the speed limit, I trust they will pay the price.

 

Using red diesel is a deliberate act of fraud. It does not normally happen accidentally. When you put it in the tank, there is one purpose - to commit tax evasion.

 

Comparing the two, to try to excuse red diesel users, is just a bit simplistic.

 

I entirely agree.

 

To be honest, from what has been said here I'm struggling to see the point of it because it doesn't appear to be worth it.

 

Thinking about it from the point of view of my own car. It does 46 to the gallon. DERV is £1.39. ***** Red is about 72p, as far as I'm aware. Doing 10K miles a year on DERV means I spend £1,300 a year on fuel. If I was running it on red then I would spend £700, saving £600 a year.

 

However, looking at what has been said on here; If (when) you get caught the absolute minimum fine will be £500. If your car gets impounded then there will be at least a £150 towing fee and £20 for every day before you collect it. You will also get charged the duty you have evaded on what is in your tank, lets call it £20 which I think is on the cautious side. We'll assume you incur travelling expenses of £20 to go and fetch it. So, if you get caught once which involves your car being towed it will have copst you an absolute minimum of £710 so you have already exceeded the saving by £210. Based on that scenario and that annual mileage you would actually have to drive, uncaught, for 14.2 months just to break even for getting caught once.

 

They might decide to inquire further and ask you to produce reciepts for the legitimate fuel you have bought and if you can't may start to back-date what they think you have used in Red fuel. That will get very expensive. In addition, they might refuse to release your vehicle until you had changed the fuel system.

 

Some people have mentioned that they are VAT registered. If that is the case then it's even more pointless to use Red. My hypothetical £1,300 a year running DERV is reduced to £1,100 after the VAT is claimed back. Because the use of Red is illegal you can hardly put the reciepts for it through the books (not that it will be being bought from legit sources anyway) so you are still paying 72p for the Red meaning that the saving is reduced to £400. On this basis you would only break even if you managed not to get caught before 21.3 months after you started using Red.

 

This supposes, of course, that when you get caught (which you will) you only get the lighest possible penalty. You could actually get far worse like getting your car crushed - which is in addition to all of the above and which is very likely to happen for a second offence - or getting a criminal record or even being locked up. Neither of which is good if you have an FAC/SGC.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

wot even if your giving them away?

 

Yes.

 

J.

[overandunder2012]

who cares anyway? it always amuses me when one or two of our flock starts foaming at the gills and getting all holier than thou on the so called criminal element, truly priceless

if anyone is contemplating using red derv in their car or works van etc you know the consequences, up to you if you want to take a risk

 

classic lol

[BRNDL]

I entirely agree.

 

To be honest, from what has been said here I'm struggling to see the point of it because it doesn't appear to be worth it.

 

Thinking about it from the point of view of my own car. It does 46 to the gallon. DERV is £1.39. ***** Red is about 72p, as far as I'm aware. Doing 10K miles a year on DERV means I spend £1,300 a year on fuel. If I was running it on red then I would spend £700, saving £600 a year.

 

However, looking at what has been said on here; If (when) you get caught the absolute minimum fine will be £500. If your car gets impounded then there will be at least a £150 towing fee and £20 for every day before you collect it. You will also get charged the duty you have evaded on what is in your tank, lets call it £20 which I think is on the cautious side. We'll assume you incur travelling expenses of £20 to go and fetch it. So, if you get caught once which involves your car being towed it will have copst you an absolute minimum of £710 so you have already exceeded the saving by £210. Based on that scenario and that annual mileage you would actually have to drive, uncaught, for 14.2 months just to break even for getting caught once.

 

They might decide to inquire further and ask you to produce reciepts for the legitimate fuel you have bought and if you can't may start to back-date what they think you have used in Red fuel. That will get very expensive. In addition, they might refuse to release your vehicle until you had changed the fuel system.

 

Some people have mentioned that they are VAT registered. If that is the case then it's even more pointless to use Red. My hypothetical £1,300 a year running DERV is reduced to £1,100 after the VAT is claimed back. Because the use of Red is illegal you can hardly put the reciepts for it through the books (not that it will be being bought from legit sources anyway) so you are still paying 72p for the Red meaning that the saving is reduced to £400. On this basis you would only break even if you managed not to get caught before 21.3 months after you started using Red.

 

This supposes, of course, that when you get caught (which you will) you only get the lighest possible penalty. You could actually get far worse like getting your car crushed - which is in addition to all of the above and which is very likely to happen for a second offence - or getting a criminal record or even being locked up. Neither of which is good if you have an FAC/SGC.

 

J.

 

It is risk Vs reward.

 

If YOU personally feel the reward of saving money out weighs the potential risks you face of being repremanded for the offence then running red diesel becomes an attractive option. Its significance prevails only in personal circumstances. For instance, a good friend of mine has been running it for 5 years and completes circa 20k a year...

 

Do the maths on this and you WILL find a healthy saving of £6000.00 approx. His risk is small in comparison to his reward, based on his own evaluation.

 

Others for instance, the riskmay out weigh the reward.

[BRNDL]

Also there is a member a couple of pages back that has/does work in this field. He states on being pulled over, if customs are present you are issues a fine of £500 on the spot. If customs are not present you car is towed and you have to pay more charges on top of the £500, taking the total to around £750.00

 

I think I am correct in stating that it is repeat offenders or offenders that do not pay the fines that have their vehicle crushed?